Jump to content
Join us for draft day two conversation, click here! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ashbury

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    41,473

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    465

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ashbury

  1. ashbury
    If an opinion's misguided on a par with denying the color of the sky, a good rebuttal should be easy to write. Consider doing that, instead of implying that people ought to keep their thoughts to themselves. If the disagreement is more nuanced, then a good rebuttal is even more worth writing, as it may contribute to a worthwhile discussion. PS: the sky outside my window is currently rather gray, in contrast to the "blue" I keep reading about. Moderator's note: OK, I guess I've talked myself into realizing that what I'm really asking is to not threadjack this article with a tangent about positivity, negativity, sarcasm...
  2. ashbury
    Rodney was around for most of the season. Trevor's ERA was 4.50 when Rodney got traded; he had had 3 consecutive bad games, so apparently Rodney wan't able to nip that in the bud while he was still there. Teams have coaches, for the purposes you described. Veteran leadership on the roster is useful but a bit overrated.
  3. ashbury
    Corporate-speak like he engaged in suggests to me that he can't say what he's actually thinking.
  4. ashbury
    Of all the ways I anticipated this sentence being completed - such as "make a run at winning the division" - a reference to "flexibility moving forward" didn't rank very high. I'm not asking him to make a brash prediction that he'll be hung for later. But with all the qualifiers he stated... this is deflating. I'm not interested in the front office's flexibility. He's not the star of the show. I watch the games in hopes of competitive baseball. He begins his reply with a focus on "this... group" of players but then pivots back to the FO. If he's not willing to characterize the year as rebuilding, but his aspirations aren't on winning... then, uh, what? "Sights set on Cleveland" as an afterthought later on didn't do it for me. He's not very inspiring. "Twins Baseball: come for the young prospects, stay for the flexibility moving forward!"
  5. ashbury
    Not sure I follow. There's usually 3 other PA for him in the game. When the results of those look good enough over a period of time, decrease the bunting if that seems right. Meanwhile, embrace the likely .350+ OBP on the bunt attempts if he gets truly good at it (the discussion is moot if he can't), and enjoy the cautiously drawn-in infield when he swings away. Also, bunting can be a fluid tactical choice within a given PA. I don't see how his psyche is scarred for life, by playing to one of his strengths. That's why you have coaches, to keep guys focused. Unwritten rules, and implications that someone isn't being manly enough, are for the birds - the other team wants you to limit your own options, if you buy into their bantering rhetoric. I don't think anyone is advocating bunting in situations when the baserunner situation isn't favorable. And I was kidding the other day when I suggested gunning for DiMaggio's hitting streak by bunting exclusively, BTW.
  6. ashbury
    There is this button labeled MultiQuote. You should give it a spin.
  7. ashbury
    Maybe it could have been a larger sample size if he had done better. / No I don't really have a point.
  8. ashbury
    Could he break DiMaggio's record if he bunted frequently, game after game after game?
  9. ashbury
  10. ashbury
    If injuries have accounted for flailing at breaking pitches in the dirt, then I'm with you. Personally I think they are two separate provisos involved with our being happy with him.
  11. ashbury
    The nickname is a fish. Miami has one too, the Marlins. What's "horrible"?
  12. ashbury
    The book is still open on Polanco, but at the moment he is a good example of why I say you should take age into account when evaluating minor league stats. On average, players gain skills year by year, and they move up to harder leagues that tax those skills. Simply adding up stats doesn't tell you enough, and stats that seemingly stagnate from year to year may hide a lot of growth. It's an inexact art and others surely do it better, but I rate each minor league level as .100 OPS harder than the one below it, and I estimate .100 OPS improvement each year for a player, until around age 24. Players can have a bad year and I throw it out if that's what it looks like - they can have an outlier "career year" and I do likewise - fluctuation occurs, and progress is not steady, and injuries occur, and good luck happens. Getting called up early can mess with the player's mind and his progression. But all in all, Polanco's age 19-21 seasons at A, high-A and AA, told me to keep an eye on him. Max Kepler looked like he'd reach the majors, by the same general method. I had higher hopes for Eduardo Escobar when he was obtained, than some, same way. But the same methodology had me keeping tabs on Max Murphy and Travis Harrison too. *shrug* Anyway, don't look at AA stats for a 21-year old the same way you would for 23, is my suggestion.
  13. ashbury
    I think by 54 we all start to feel the wisdom of not legging out every routine grounder.
  14. ashbury
    If he is fine, he will play 150+ games. I think that's the way to look at it.
  15. ashbury
    Yachta not make puns like those, canoe stop?
  16. ashbury
    I think it's safe to say literally 100% of the people empowered to vote on the question disagree with your position. That's rare for any position, on any topic.
  17. ashbury
    I'll condense your post to this sentence for the purpose of my reply. I'm reminded of a letter supposedly sent to Dear Abby long ago. It went along the lines of "Dear Abby, my husband has left me. I'm 46 years old, with no job experience, and I'm thinking of going back to school and getting the college degree that I never tried for when I got married at 18. Everyone tells me I can do the work necessary to succeed in college. But, Abby, I'd be 50 when I graduated! Should I do this?" And Abby (is said to have) replied, "And how old will you be in 4 years if you DON'T go to college?" I'd love to have a good playoff run, but that's not the sole criterion. I want good baseball. I'm not of the "all in for the WS, or else tank" philosophy (and that might be where the disconnect is, relative to some posters). Any pool of baseball assets is inherently a depreciating one, so you must replenish via all avenues, continually. Acquire talent that other teams covet, instead of concentrating on filler. Sometimes this requires money. If it doesn't work out due to circumstances such as the young cheap guys not panning out as hoped, or even if the acquired FA talents fizzle, then deal with it then. (If every asset fails, go back and figure out what's wrong with the system.) "But we might not have a good season if we acquire McCutchen [or whoever] and then Buxton/Sano fail?" "And how good a season will we have if Buxton/Sano fail, without McCutchen?"
  18. ashbury
    I'm not advocating for going to extremes, such as signing players to lengthy contracts that will hamstring the team for years as future events unfold. But acquiring talent when you're not sure of what you've got, and then dealing with the happy circumstance of too much talent, was still possible this off-season. McCutchen signed for 3 years. That contract wouldn't be an albatross, and would be preferable to what they are paying Cron in my estimation. Aiming higher with the pitchers they signed would be another avenue toward bolstering talent during uncertainty - relievers are generally always fungible if you find yourself overstocked. Uncertainty is a fact of life for any team. That doesn't mean marking time. Damage caused by taking action is often easy to spot and then critique. Failing to shore things up and perform maintenance is less obviously costly, and is also generally underrated. This and the next several seasons for the Twins are an era of young cheap talent produced by the farm system, albeit talent of as yet uncertain quality, and the thing to do is apply unused financial resources during this period in case the young talent flops. What exactly are we saving the money for?
  19. ashbury
    It was his age-22 season. That's young for AAA, even accounting for roster filler. BB-REF.com will show me the top 100 batters in games played, and there were 4 guys age 22 and one at 21. Mind you, I was seriously unimpressed with what I saw from him in SSS in person. But he's young enough that we probably haven't seen the best from him yet.
  20. ashbury
    The wording sounds to me like "either compete for a post-season spot, or tank". If the aim was simply to win the most games they can, then the possible failure of a couple of key parts like Sano and Buxton would not affect the decision to improve other parts of the roster. Apparently the prospect of another 78-84 on a $130M payroll is the most revolting development they can conceive of. I don't happen to like tanking, and I think a team that does it gets what it deserves where revenue is concerned. But I realize that others differ.
  21. ashbury
    Your point isn't completely bad, but let's please keep this thread on the topic that the article laid out, namely the roster choices, and not go off onto a tangent about fellow posters. Also, keep in mind that the voices you are hearing are neither monolithic nor static. Me for instance: I've felt more critical of the moves this season than in years past, and I've been saying so. That doesn't make it "constant bashing". What's more, if I hold my tongue now, and then complain if they get off to a 10-25 start, then I'm being a front runner. Instead, I'm expressing my concerns, and if they're proved wrong I'll acknowledge that. This place is for good conversation. We shouldn't try to squelch it. If you or others feel the need to talk further about the attitudes of fellow posters, please start a new thread.
  22. ashbury
    I prefer sauerkraut on my brats. Oh, and don't call players names.
  23. ashbury
    Except for Nelson Cruz, this off-season has felt more like an expansion draft, 1962 New York Mets style. In effect we've picked up Elio Chacon for middle infield, washed up Gil Hodges at 1B, and Roger Craig for our rotation. Not bad players individually, but 40-120 caliber to supplement our core when all is said and done.
  24. ashbury
    Can't help wondering: Dave St. Peter is OK with this?
  25. ashbury
    We don't know with certainty what becomes of unused payroll. It may get applied to different purposes within the organization to make it stronger. It may go to charity. What we do know with some certainty* is that it doesn't get banked to the next year's payroll, which does align with your main point. * No, I haven't invested further time locating an interview transcript from several years ago.
×
×
  • Create New...